Re: [Sbcl-devel] CL:DIRECTORY

Richard M Kreuter writes:
> I think I would not object to including the feature if you addressed
> these two points.
And please submit patches in unified diff format (the output format of
'diff -u').
--
Richard

Thread view

TC-Rucho writes:
> Since SBCL already has a directory function it should have
> non-truenames listing which is, in my humble oppinion, a must.
If you care about having your program port across implementations, you'd
be better off using some third party library than depending on
implementation-specific extensions.
If you only care about running on SBCL, you'll probably save yourself
some grief in the long run by listing directories with routines in
sb-posix.
As for your patch, I have two issues:
(1) Adding keywords to PROBE-FILE is out of the question. A call to
PROBE-FILE with more than one argument is likely not to compile on
other conforming implementations. As far as I can tell, you could
have DIRECTORY call QUERY-FILE-SYSTEM directly, rather than go
through PROBE-FILE.
(2) It seems to me that there can be more than one way for a pathname
not to be a "truename", even granting that "truename" is a hazy
notion. So if DIRECTORY will have an argument to control symlink
resolution, I'd rather the argument be something like
:RESOLVE-SYMLINKS rather than :TRUENAMES.
I think I would not object to including the feature if you addressed
these two points.
--
Richard

Richard M Kreuter writes:
> I think I would not object to including the feature if you addressed
> these two points.
And please submit patches in unified diff format (the output format of
'diff -u').
--
Richard